In Pelling Estate v. Pelling (I) (Ont CA, 2026) the Ontario Court of Appeal considered (in the first of two similar rulings) an issue of 'testamentary intention' in deed-related documents:
[1] The appellant appeals an October 18, 2024 judgment, specifically the application judge’s finding that a 2006 Transfer/Deed and Direction did not have testamentary effect. He also seeks leave to appeal the application judge’s costs order dated February 5, 2025 (the “Cost Order”) in which he was granted his costs on a partial indemnity basis.
[2] This is the first of two appeals from the October 18, 2024 judgment and related Cost Order that were heard together (COA-24-CV-1271 and COA-24-CV-1390).
[3] The appellant argues that the Transfer/Deed and Direction should be given effect as a statement of the testator’s intention to transfer the Three Mile Lake property after her death. The appellant acknowledges that the Deed/Transfer and Direction do not comply with the requirements of a valid will under the Succession Law Reform Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. S.26, particularly given that s. 21.1 of the Act did not come into effect until after the testator’s death. He is unable to identify any legal basis upon which the court could find that the Deed/Transfer and Direction are valid testamentary documents. His appeal with respect to the Deed/Transfer and Direction is therefore dismissed.
The author has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this Isthatlegal.ca webpage.
